DOCSLIB.ORG

The Report of the Daniel Morgan Independent Panel

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Report of the Daniel Morgan Independent Panel The Report of the Daniel Morgan Independent Panel The Report of the Daniel Morgan Independent Panel June 2021 Volume 2 HC 11-II Return to an Address of the Honourable the House of Commons dated 15th June 2021 for The Report of the Daniel Morgan Independent Panel Volume 2 Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed on 15th June 2021 HC 11-II © Crown copyright 2021 This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3. Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. This publication is available at www.gov.uk/official-documents. Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at [email protected]. ISBN 978-1-5286-2479-4 Volume 2 of 3 CCS0220047602 06/21 Printed on paper containing 75% recycled fibre content minimum Printed in the UK by the APS Group on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office Contents Volume 2 Chapter 5: The 2000 Murder Review: The Cold Case Review of the Investigation into Daniel Morgan’s Murder 443 Chapter 6: Abelard One/Morgan Two Investigation 475 Chapter 7: The 2006 Report from the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police Service to the Metropolitan Police Authority (‘the 2006 Report’) 603 Chapter 8: The Abelard Two Investigation 647 Chapter 5: The 2000 Murder Review: The Cold Case Review of the Investigation into Daniel Morgan’s Murder Contents 1 Introduction 2 Background to the 2000 Murder Review 3 The Terms of Reference of the 2000 Murder Review 4 The 2000 Murder Review Report: methodology 5 Findings of the 2000 Murder Review Report 6 Family liaison 7 The 2000 Murder Review’s recommendations 8 The Metropolitan Police response to the 2000 Murder Review Report 1 Introduction 1. Today it is routine for unsolved murders, or cold cases, to be reviewed periodically, to explore whether new evidential opportunities exist which justify reopening the investigation. This was less the case prior to the millennium. However, in 1998 the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) Crime Committee issued revised guidelines for the review of cold cases. Further to the guidelines, the Metropolitan Police determined that all undetected murders committed since 1997 should be reviewed, as well as, exceptionally, some murders committed before 1997. The murder of Daniel Morgan in 1987 was judged an exceptional case and was the first pre-1997 murder to be reviewed according to the new procedure. 2. In June 2000, a review of the investigation into the murder of Daniel Morgan commenced, undertaken by the Metropolitan Police Murder Review Group. DI Steve Hagger, assisted by two other officers, worked solely on the records generated by the two previous police investigations (Morgan One and Hampshire/Police Complaints Authority), as well as relevant intelligence 443 The Report of the Daniel Morgan Independent Panel arising from other police operations (principally Operation Nigeria/Two Bridges). Their review was purely documentary: they did not interview officers previously involved in the case, nor did they contact Daniel Morgan’s family. They did not work on any other matter at this time. 3. The Panel refers to the review, here and elsewhere in our Report, as ‘the 2000 Murder Review’. DI Steve Hagger completed his 86-page Murder Review Report in October 2000. The Report contained 83 recommendations and, in addition, identified 22 considerations, or lines of enquiry, that a future investigation might consider. It was on the basis of this Murder Review Report, together with representations from other sources, that in 2001 the third investigation into Daniel Morgan’s murder (Abelard One/Morgan Two) was mounted. 1.1 Chronology of key events relating to the 2000 Murder Review • Autumn 1998 Introduction of the Murder Investigation Manual by the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) and the ACPO Crime Committee ‘Revised Guidelines for Major Crime Reviews’. • 24 September 1999 During the course of Operation Nigeria/Two Bridges, 11 suspects were arrested in connection with offences centred on a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. • 03 November 1999 DI Michael Gates, who had worked on Operation Nigeria/Two Bridges, was instructed to review the information gained from that operation relating to the murder of Daniel Morgan, to ascertain if there was new evidence. • 16 November 1999 D/Supt Robert Quick wrote to DCI Barry Nicholson requesting a report cataloguing developments during Operation Nigeria/Two Bridges and providing an analysis of any new investigative opportunities. • 02 February 2000 DI Michael Gates produced a report summarising five pieces of intelligence originating from Operation Nigeria/Two Bridges. • 03 February 2000 Upon receipt of DI Michael Gates’ report, DCI Barry Nicholson wrote to DAC Roy Clark, stating that ‘it may now be appropriate for consideration to be given, to appointing a Murder Review Team’. • 03 February 2000 DCS David Wood forwarded DI Michael Gates’ report to Commander Andrew Hayman. In his accompanying note, DCS Wood stated his agreement that the murder should be reviewed. • 23 May 2000 DCI Barry Nicholson briefed DCS Barry Webb, first Head of the Murder Review Group, on the intelligence contained in DI Gates’ report. As a result of that briefing, DCS Webb agreed to review the murder of Daniel Morgan. • 26 June 2000 DI Steve Hagger was appointed to conduct the 2000 Murder Review under the Terms of Reference laid down by DCS Barry Webb. • 06 October 2000 The review was completed, and the 2000 Murder Review Report was produced by DI Steve Hagger. • 14 November 2000 DI Steve Hagger presented the 2000 Murder Review Report to senior officers, and a re-investigation was agreed. 444 Chapter 5: The 2000 Murder Review: The Cold Case Review of the Investigation into Daniel Morgan’s Murder • February 2001 As a result of the 2000 Murder Review Report, the Abelard One/ Morgan Two Investigation was established (see Chapter 6, The Abelard One/Morgan Two Investigation). Officers of significance in the 2000 Murder Review, in order of rank • Deputy Assistant Commissioner Roy Clark • Detective Chief Superintendent Barry Webb • Detective Inspector Steve Hagger 2 Background to the 2000 Murder Review 4. In 1998, the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) introduced two policy documents, both of which included reference to the cold case review of murder investigations. The ‘Murder Investigation Manual’, introduced in September 1998, stated that ‘it is good practice to periodically review undetected murder cases. It is suggested this is undertaken at least every two years.’1 5. The other policy document, the ACPO Crime Committee’s ‘Revised Guidelines for Major Crime Reviews’, stated that: ‘[t]he objective of any review is to constructively evaluate the conduct of an investigation to ensure: • It conforms to nationally approved standards; • It is thorough; • It has been conducted with integrity and objectivity; • That no investigative opportunities have been overlooked; • That good practice is identified.’2 6. The purpose of such cold case reviews was to be of assistance to the police, primarily by checking the work undertaken and by recommending lines of enquiry. The Metropolitan Police Special Notice 6/99, dated March 1999, stated the following: ‘It is important to stress that there is an absolute need for a review to be carried out in a spirit of co-operation between the reviewing officer and the SIO [Senior Investigating Officer]. The review should always be regarded by an SIO as being of assistance and support to the investigation.’3 1 Association of Chief Police Officers, ‘Murder Investigation Manual’, MPS109705001, p247, September 1998. 2 Association of Chief Police Officers, ‘Murder Investigation Manual’, MPS094339001, p229, 2006. 3 Special Notice 6/99, MPS107551001, p15, 31 March 1999. 445 The Report of the Daniel Morgan Independent Panel 7. The Metropolitan Police Special Notice 6/99 further stated that: ‘[u]ndertaking a cold case review on all existing unsolved murders will not be practical. The cold-case review procedure will apply to all undetected murders committed after Wednesday 1 January 1997. Consideration should be given to reviewing older cases as workload permits.’4 2.1 Operation Nigeria/Two Bridges draws to a close 8. In September 1999, Operation Nigeria/Two Bridges, which had focused on links between corrupt police officers and Law & Commercial (formerly Southern Investigations, the business that had been managed jointly by Jonathan Rees and Daniel Morgan), led to a number of arrests. On 24 September, 11 people were arrested in connection with offences centred on a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice (see Chapter 4, Operation Nigeria/Two Bridges). Officers continued to receive information relevant to Operation Nigeria/Two Bridges after the arrests. 9. Further to requests from Daniel Morgan’s brother, Alastair Morgan, in September and October 1999, both Richard Livsey MP5 and Chris Smith MP6 wrote to DAC Roy Clark, who had led the operation, seeking information as to whether evidence gathered had been assessed in relation to the murder of Daniel Morgan. DAC Clark replied in similar terms to both letters.7,8 In his letter to Richard Livsey MP, he said the following (emphasis in original): ‘I also indicated [to Alastair MORGAN and Isobel HÜLSMANN, Daniel MORGAN’s mother] that we have not yet uncovered any additional evidence that would justify the arrest and charge of any person for the murder of Daniel MORGAN. However, our enquiries remain very active, are ongoing and involve many investigating officers.’9 10. It was inaccurate of DAC Roy Clark to describe ongoing enquiries into Daniel Morgan’s murder as ‘very active’ and involving ‘many investigating officers’.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Met HQ Performance & Assurance Information Law & Security Group
    Met HQ Performance & Assurance Information Law & Security Group Information Rights Unit PO Box 57192 London SW6 1TR Telephone: 0207 161 3500 Facsimile: 0207 161 3503 Email: [email protected] www.met.police.uk Your ref: Our ref: 2015110000456 22 February 2016 Dear P John Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2015110000456 I write in connection with your request for information which was received by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) on 09/11/2015. Your request was as follows: I would be most grateful if you would elaborate the following items; 1) Disclose what action you have taken (if any) in consequence of the statements made by Greg Miskiw, reported in the article entitled "Miskiw Confirms: News of the World subverted Murder Inquiry on behalf of Murder Suspects" (since that would appear to suggest a criminal offence has occurred) 2) Confirm or deny that in late summer of 2002, the Morgan murder inquiry team requested that the anti-corruption command led DAC Andy Hayman undertake a financial inquiry into in Alex Marunchak's dealings with Southern Investigations, and if so disclose that request, and indicate what action was subsequently taken. 3) Confirm or deny that DCS David Cook remains suspended and under investigation, and if so for what reason, and if not when that case was discontinued and for what reason 4) Confirm or deny the existence of an ongoing investigation into the Daniel Morgan case. Absent a positive answer to item 4 above, the axe murdering psychopath who killed Daniel Morgan is still at large, and it remains difficult to conceive the level of offending that would shame your officers into upholding the rights of the victim and the letter of the law.
    [Show full text]
  • HRWF Human Rights in the World Newsletter Bulgaria Table Of
    Table of Contents • EU votes for diplomats to boycott China Winter Olympics over rights abuses • CCP: 100th Anniversary of the party who killed 50 million • The CCP at 100: What next for human rights in EU-China relations? • Missing Tibetan monk was sentenced, sent to prison, family says • China occupies sacred land in Bhutan, threatens India • 900,000 Uyghur children: the saddest victims of genocide • EU suspends efforts to ratify controversial investment deal with China • Sanctions expose EU-China split • Recalling 10 March 1959 and origins of the CCP colonization in Tibet • Tibet: Repression increases before Tibetan Uprising Day • Uyghur Group Defends Detainee Database After Xinjiang Officials Allege ‘Fake Archive’ • Will the EU-China investment agreement survive Parliament’s scrutiny? • Experts demand suspension of EU-China Investment Deal • Sweden is about to deport activist to China—Torture and prison be damned • EU-CHINA: Advocacy for the Uyghur issue • Who are the Uyghurs? Canadian scholars give profound insights • Huawei enables China’s grave human rights violations • It's 'Captive Nations Week' — here's why we should care • EU-China relations under the German presidency: is this “Europe’s moment”? • If EU wants rule of law in China, it must help 'dissident' lawyers • Happening in Europe, too • U.N. experts call call for decisive measures to protect fundamental freedoms in China • EU-China Summit: Europe can, and should hold China to account • China is the world’s greatest threat to religious freedom and other basic human rights
    [Show full text]
  • The Report of the Daniel Morgan Independent Panel
    The Report of the Daniel Morgan Independent Panel The Report of the Daniel Morgan Independent Panel June 2021 Volume 1 HC 11-I Return to an Address of the Honourable the House of Commons dated 15th June 2021 for The Report of the Daniel Morgan Independent Panel Volume 1 Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed on 15th June 2021 HC 11-I © Crown copyright 2021 This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3. Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. This publication is available at www.gov.uk/official-documents. Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at [email protected]. ISBN 978-1-5286-2479-4 Volume 1 of 3 CCS0220047602 06/21 Printed on paper containing 75% recycled fibre content minimum Printed in the UK by the APS Group on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office Daniel Morgan Independent Panel Daniel Morgan Independent Panel Home Office 2 Marsham Street London SW1P 4DF Rt Hon Priti Patel MP Home Secretary Home Office 2 Marsham Street London SW1P 4DF May 2021 Dear Home Secretary On behalf of the Daniel Morgan Independent Panel, I am pleased to present you with our Report for publication in Parliament. The establishment of the Daniel Morgan Independent Panel was announced by the Home Secretary, the Rt Hon Theresa May MP, on 10 May 2013 in a written statement to the House of Commons.
    [Show full text]
  • The Attorney General's Ninth Annual Report to Congress Pursuant to The
    THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S NINTH ANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS PURSUANT TO THE EMMETT TILL UNSOLVED CIVIL RIGHTS CRIME ACT OF 2007 AND THIRD ANNUALREPORT TO CONGRESS PURSUANT TO THE EMMETT TILL UNSOLVEDCIVIL RIGHTS CRIMES REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2016 March 1, 2021 INTRODUCTION This is the ninth annual Report (Report) submitted to Congress pursuant to the Emmett Till Unsolved Civil Rights Crime Act of2007 (Till Act or Act), 1 as well as the third Report submitted pursuant to the Emmett Till Unsolved Civil Rights Crimes Reauthorization Act of 2016 (Reauthorization Act). 2 This Report includes information about the Department of Justice's (Department) activities in the time period since the eighth Till Act Report, and second Reauthorization Report, which was dated June 2019. Section I of this Report summarizes the historical efforts of the Department to prosecute cases involving racial violence and describes the genesis of its Cold Case Int~~ative. It also provides an overview ofthe factual and legal challenges that federal prosecutors face in their "efforts to secure justice in unsolved Civil Rights-era homicides. Section II ofthe Report presents the progress made since the last Report. It includes a chart ofthe progress made on cases reported under the initial Till Act and under the Reauthorization Act. Section III of the Report provides a brief overview of the cases the Department has closed or referred for preliminary investigation since its last Report. Case closing memoranda written by Department attorneys are available on the Department's website: https://www.justice.gov/crt/civil-rights-division-emmett­ till-act-cold-ca e-clo ing-memoranda.
    [Show full text]
  • Hacking Affair Is Not Over – but What Would a Second Leveson Inquiry Achieve?
    7/10/2019 Hacking affair is not over – but what would a second Leveson inquiry achieve? Academic rigour, journalistic flair Hacking affair is not over – but what would a second Leveson inquiry achieve? July 25, 2014 3.57pm BST Author John Jewell Director of Undergraduate Studies, School of Journalism, Media and Cultural Studies, Cardiff University On we go. Ian Nicholson/PA In the latest episode in the long-running saga that is the phone hacking affair, Dan Evans, a former journalist at the News of the World and Sunday Mirror, has received a 10 month suspended sentence after being convicted of two counts of phone hacking, one of making illegal payments to officials, and one of perverting the course of justice. Coming so soon after the conviction of Andy Coulson and the acquittal of Rebekah Brooks and others, one could be forgiven for assuming that the whole phone hacking business is now done and dusted. Not a bit of it. As Julian Petley has written: “Eleven more trials are due to take place involving 20 current or former Sun and News of the World journalists, who are accused variously of making illegal payments to public officials, conspiring to intercept voicemail and accessing data on stolen mobile phones.” We also learned in June that Scotland Yard had officially told Rupert Murdoch of their intention to interview him as part of their inquiry into allegations of crime at his British newspapers. The Guardian revealed that Murdoch was first contacted in 2013, but the police ceded to his lawyers’ request that any interrogation should wait until the Coulson–Brooks trial had finished.
    [Show full text]
  • Unauthorised Tapping Into Or Hacking of Mobile Communications
    House of Commons Home Affairs Committee Unauthorised tapping into or hacking of mobile communications Thirteenth Report of Session 2010–12 1. This report is strictly embargoed and is not for broadcast or publication, in any form, before 05.00hrs, Wednesday 20 July 2011. 2. This report is issued under the condition that it should not be forwarded or copied to anyone else. 3. Under no circumstances should you distribute copies to anyone else or speak to the media before the publication time about the content of this report. 4. The report is subject to parliamentary copyright and you are not permitted to distribute, replicate, or publish further copies either in hard copy or on the internet either before or after publication. 5. If these instructions are unclear in any way please contact Alex Paterson on 020 7219 1589 or email [email protected] HC 907 Unauthorised tapping into or hacking of mobile communications 3 House of Commons Home Affairs Committee Unauthorised tapping into or hacking of mobile communications Thirteenth Report of Session 2010–12 Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 19 July 2011 HC 907 Published on 20 July 2011 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £0.00 The Home Affairs Committee The Home Affairs Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Home Office and its associated public bodies. Current membership Rt Hon Keith Vaz MP (Labour, Leicester East) (Chair) Nicola Blackwood MP (Conservative, Oxford West
    [Show full text]
  • Aftermath of the Anti-Terrorism Police Raids in Forest Gate on 2 June 2006
    Scrutiny by the Metropolitan Police Authority of communication and media at the Metropolitan Police Service with particular reference to the handling of media and communications during the Forest Gate incident of June 2006 Aftermath of the Anti-Terrorism Police Raids in Forest Gate on 2 June 2006 Submission of Newham Monitoring Project 27 September 2006 Aftermath of the Police Raids in Forest Gate on 2 June 2006 1. Terms of Reference 1.1. On Friday 2 June, 2006 police carried out raids on 46 and 48 Lansdown Road, Forest Gate, London. In the weeks following these raids the Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA) amended its existing scrutiny programme of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) for 2006/7 to include the media and communications strategy of the MPS. 1.2. The stated objectives of this amendment to the MPA’s scrutiny programme is to : a) Assess the extent to which the MPS has the strategies, policies, protocols and processes in place to ensure efficient and effective communication, media and reputation management, particularly in the context of the 24 hour news environment. b) Undertake a detailed analysis of the handling of the media and communication during the Forest Gate incident in June 2006. c) Assess how effectively the MPS engages internally to manage communication to the media, Londoners and stakeholders, particularly during sensitive operations. d) Understand the culture of the MPS towards communication and media management and the impact this has on the delivery of an effective service. e) Evaluate the use of resources available to the MPS to deliver this key function, including understanding the division of resources and lines of accountability between central and local directorates.
    [Show full text]
  • Press Freedom Under Attack
    LEVESON’S ILLIBERAL LEGACY AUTHORS HELEN ANTHONY MIKE HARRIS BREAKING SASHY NATHAN PADRAIG REIDY NEWS FOREWORD BY PROFESSOR TIM LUCKHURST PRESS FREEDOM UNDER ATTACK , LEVESON S ILLIBERAL LEGACY FOREWORD EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1. WHY IS THE FREE PRESS IMPORTANT? 2. THE LEVESON INQUIRY, REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 2.1 A background to Leveson: previous inquiries and press complaints bodies 2.2 The Leveson Inquiry’s Limits • Skewed analysis • Participatory blind spots 2.3 Arbitration 2.4 Exemplary Damages 2.5 Police whistleblowers and press contact 2.6 Data Protection 2.7 Online Press 2.8 Public Interest 3. THE LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK – A LEGAL ANALYSIS 3.1 A rushed and unconstitutional regime 3.2 The use of statute to regulate the press 3.3 The Royal Charter and the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013 • The use of a Royal Charter • Reporting to Parliament • Arbitration • Apologies • Fines 3.4 The Crime and Courts Act 2013 • Freedom of expression • ‘Provided for by law’ • ‘Outrageous’ • ‘Relevant publisher’ • Exemplary damages and proportionality • Punitive costs and the chilling effect • Right to a fair trial • Right to not be discriminated against 3.5 The Press Recognition Panel 4. THE WIDER IMPACT 4.1 Self-regulation: the international norm 4.2 International response 4.3 The international impact on press freedom 5. RECOMMENDATIONS 6. CONCLUSION 3 , LEVESON S ILLIBERAL LEGACY 4 , LEVESON S ILLIBERAL LEGACY FOREWORD BY TIM LUCKHURST PRESS FREEDOM: RESTORING BRITAIN’S REPUTATION n January 2014 I felt honour bound to participate in a meeting, the very ‘Our liberty cannot existence of which left me saddened be guarded but by the and ashamed.
    [Show full text]
  • I. CENSUS DATA Ii. NEWS
    INDEX DATE FILED: February 24, 2021 3:43 PM i. CENSUS DATA Exhibit 1: Quick Facts, US Census Bureau, https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/adamscountycoloradoJeffersoncountycolorado, arapahoecountycolorado,elpasocountycolorado,denvercountycolorado,weldcountycolorado/P ST120219 Exhibit 2: 2019 Weld County Colorado: Economic and Demographic Profile, Upstate Colorado, https://www.weldgov.com/UserFiles/Servers/Server_6/File/Departments/Planning%20&%20 Zoning/2019%20WC-Demographic-Profile-2019.pdf ii. NEWS 9 News ( KUSA) Exhibit 3: We never expected to find out what happened to her:" Jonelle Matthews' family talks about court case, 9 News (February 5, 2021), https://www.9news.com/article/news/crime/jonelle-matthews-family-seeing-daughters- alleged-killer/73-3d4659d2-8d80-43b7-8cad-d211029dc411 Exhibit 4: Weld County coroner says Jonelle Matthews was shot in head, 9 News (October 16, 2020), https://www.9news.com/article/news/crime/weld-county-coroner-releases- autopsy-for-jonelle-matthews/73-de8630e3-79b0-4267-88d6-e402498e4e5f Exhibit 5: Jonelle Matthews Family Said Indictment is Step Towards Justice, 9 News (October 14, 2020), https://www.9news.com/article/news/crime/jonelle-matthews-family- says-indictment-is-a-step-towards-justice/73-81d73310-173a-4950-a515-b9697473a099 Exhibit 6: Man indicted in death of Jonelle Matthews, 9 News (October 13, 2020), https://www.9news.com/article/news/crime/man-indicted-in-death-of-jonelle-matthews/73- OeOae153-7380-4ee4-b017-97eae702ba3b Exhibit 7: Jonelle Matthews Case: Grand jury to Investigate 1984 Homicide, 9 News (August 18, 2020), https://www.9news.com/article/news/crime/grandy-jury-investigating- jonelle-matthews-death/73-134dee0e-d6cb-46d5-99b4-6b1d6afb1ee3 Exhibit 8: Autopsy report for missing Colorado girl Jonelle Matthews, 9 News (June 19.
    [Show full text]
  • Summer 2011 Bulletinprimary.Indd
    A PUBLICATION OF THE SILHA CENTER FOR THE STUDY OF MEDIA ETHICS AND LAW | SUMMER 2011 Not Just a ‘Rogue Reporter’: ‘Phone Hacking’ Scandal Spreads Far and Wide The so-called “phone hacking” scandal has led to more than Murdoch Closes News of the World and a dozen arrests, resignations by top News Corp. executives Speaks to Parliament while Public and British police, the launching of several new investigations Outrage Grows over Tabloid Crime, into News Corp. business practices, and pressured Murdoch to retreat from a business deal to purchase the remaining Collusion, and Corruption portion of BSkyB that he did not own. The U.S. Department of Justice and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) massive ethical and legal scandal enveloped the are reportedly conducting preliminary investigations into the Rupert Murdoch-owned British tabloid News of possibility of international law violations. The FBI is reportedly the World in the summer of 2011, leading to its investigating allegations that Murdoch journalists hacked into sudden closure. New allegations arose almost the phones of victims of the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks daily that reporters and private investigators or their families. British police have teamed up with Scottish Aillegally accessed the voice mail messages of politicians, authorities to continue investigating claims of phone hacking. celebrities, and private citizens. The revelations sparked Parliament launched a formal inquiry into the scandal and has worldwide public outcry and led to sweeping law enforcement questioned top News Corp. offi cials including Rupert Murdoch investigations directed at top editors of the paper, executives and his son, James Murdoch.
    [Show full text]
  • Occum Inciment Et Fugia Nobitas Ditate Quam Neurolaw
    from SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2012 Volume 24, Issue 5 A publication of the American Society of Trial Consultants Foundation Occum inciment et fugia nobitas ditate quam Neurolaw: Trial Tips for Today and Game Changing Questions for the Future By Alison Bennett HE FUTURE OF LAW is standing on the courthouse steps. cannot predict the point in time at which the intersection of Neurolaw – the combination of neuroscience research technology and law will merge to create credible courtroom Tand the law – is worthy of attention for a number of evidence, we can look to neurolaw research today for research reasons. Neuroscientists are conducting ground-breaking findings that confirm current trial practice techniques and research with a machine called a functional MRI, or fMRI, offer new insights into jury decision making and the art of which is similar to traditional MRI technology but focuses on persuasion. brain activity, not just structure. Some would argue the use of neuroscientific evidence based on fMRI research is a premature Current Criminal Trial Applications adoption of a novel technology, but neurolaw evidence is already In the United States, neuroscientific evidence has been influencing jury trials in the United States and abroad. Billions admitted in over one hundred criminal trials now, has been of dollars are being pored into interdisciplinary neuroscience cited in at least one U. S. Supreme Court case, and is being research each year in the United States and abroad. While we admitted as evidence in other countries as well. In many cases, September/October 2012 - Volume 24, Issue 5 thejuryexpert.com 1 neuroscientific evidence was offered to mitigate sentencing “John grasped the object” and “Pablo kicked the ball.” by presenting neuroimaging highlighting brain damage that The scans revealed activity in the motor cortex, which could have diminished the perpetrator’s capacity and ability coordinates the body’s movements, indicating imagining to make rational decisions.
    [Show full text]
  • The Report of the Daniel Morgan Independent Panel
    The Report of the Daniel Morgan Independent Panel The Report of the Daniel Morgan Independent Panel June 2021 Volume 1 HC 11-I Return to an Address of the Honourable the House of Commons dated 15th June 2021 for The Report of the Daniel Morgan Independent Panel Volume 1 Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed on 15th June 2021 HC 11-I © Crown copyright 2021 This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3. Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. This publication is available at www.gov.uk/official-documents. Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at [email protected]. ISBN 978-1-5286-2479-4 Volume 1 of 3 CCS0220047602 06/21 Printed on paper containing 75% recycled fibre content minimum Printed in the UK by the APS Group on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office Daniel Morgan Independent Panel Daniel Morgan Independent Panel Home Office 2 Marsham Street London SW1P 4DF Rt Hon Priti Patel MP Home Secretary Home Office 2 Marsham Street London SW1P 4DF May 2021 Dear Home Secretary On behalf of the Daniel Morgan Independent Panel, I am pleased to present you with our Report for publication in Parliament. The establishment of the Daniel Morgan Independent Panel was announced by the Home Secretary, the Rt Hon Theresa May MP, on 10 May 2013 in a written statement to the House of Commons.
    [Show full text]